Marquis Center for Oral Surgery | Digital Marketing Manager | TX & CA | Remote | Full-time
We are one of the few Oral Surgery groups in the US that are qualified to offer full-mouth teeth replacement. The service that we provide for our patients changes everything about the quality of their daily lives. Most are unaware that there are treatment options available to reduce their suffering. We need a marketer that can help us spread the word to the proportion of the 22M people that live near our centers and can benefit from this procedure.
Great pay, flexibility, and benefits - including reimbursement for a co-working space. No resume or cover letter required, just an informal email with details about how your skills & passion match the job description. Relaxed work culture and friendly team. Check it out:
It seems like the incentive structure is broken here because the tax software companies have the wrong customer.
Their customer should be the IRS. These are the options asI see them:
1) Have the government “make” their own version. There would be little attention paid to user experience, since there’s no competition and the bureaucracy has no incentive to create good products.
2) Have the government hire a company - which is really the same as “making it” since I’m assuming government employees aren’t the ones writing the code. However, if structured properly, the outsourced company could be compensated based on user experience metrics. I see the likelihood of this happening as low.
3) Arbitrarily complicate the tax return policy. Put the burden of understanding on the citizen. Let the “free” (contrived by government intervention in this case) market fulfill the artificial need in the market. This seems to be the way things are being done now.
Trouble is, our democracy doesn’t seem to be effective at solving problems like this. It appears that we don’t have the ability to actually have a direct impact on this policy change. Only if the majority party happens to have the political willpower to work on this, and only if that party holds a majority in the house and the senate.
Couple that with a $100M+ annual investment (institutionalized bribery from my perspective) from these tax software companies to ensure that elected officials don’t unwind the artificial demand that’s been created, and you have the situation that we are in right now.
Let me know if I’ve missed anything or have been unfair. If anyone has any ideas about how an average citizen can affect this policy, I’d love to know.
A few personal usage tactics I’ve been experimenting with, since I’ve been dealing with smartphone overuse since 2005:
1) No social media apps.
2) Four icons on the home screen (for iPhone, go to this site: https://david-smith.org/blank.html click share button and add to home screen. Change wallpaper to black. Each black icon you add to the home screen will take up a space where an app would have been, helping you focus on apps that you find most important)
3) Airplane mode when I’m on vacation (so I can still use the camera but won’t be tempted to reply to a text).
4) Few notifications other than calendar, phone, and text. Absolutely no email notifications. Selective and timed Slack notifications since I’m often mobile and don’t want to be the bottleneck at work.
5) No games.
6) Limited video use. Overuse hasn’t been a problem, so I don’t set hard guidelines on this.
7) Leave phone in car [clearly I don’t live in SF] or at home during scheduled time with loved ones.
8) Wear cellular Apple Watch and carry AirPods in pocket when leaving phone at home - if there may be an important call coming in while I’m intentionally preventing myself from working while mobile.
9) Keep phone charging at night in bathroom on do not disturb. No checking during middle of the night bathroom usage.
10) Limit non-essential apps to informational apps - like HN.
Smartphones are tools first or they can be toys first. That depends on the goals and discipline level of the user.
Before jumping to the conclusion that the author is hoping you jump to, question: is it possible that he, you, and I don’t have a full view of the rare personality traits and skills that are required to be an effective Fortune 50 CEO?
I assume most of us here are in favor for exchanging money for value (versus time contributed)? Correct? Otherwise, how is a $200k SW engineer’s salary justifiable compared to a $30k fast food worker’s? In the same 40 hour work week?
I do take issue with non-founding CEOs [sometimes] having no skin in the game. I saw this when I was at BlackBerry. Win or lose, the CEO that replaced the founders would win. BlackBerry lost, he didn’t. This seems like a misalignment of incentives, but that’s up to the company to address, not me, and hopefully not the government. If the company gets the incentives wrong, they lose, and hopefully we learn.
Back to the point: if a company has an impact on billions of dollars and millions of lives, I’d prefer their leader be paid well. But my preference is irrelevant here because a company can and should decide how to value that person’s role. In contrast, I certainly wouldn’t want a government policy (and it’s guaranteed slew of unintended consequences) regulating how much a chief executive is paid.
Being an effective CEO is anything but easy. And the combination of an effective CEO’s skills and experience are extraordinarily rare. It’s not a surprise that the market prices their value accordingly.
Efficiency is not everything when it comes to nutrition.
Once someone is beyond being able to procure enough food to survive, utility is important to quality of life and long term health.
What sort of utility?
1) Total caloric intake depending on if the goal is maintenance, weight loss, or weight gain.
2) Macronutrient split depending on specific health and/or performance goals. E.G. high protein for strength trainees.
3) Micronutrient split and density for general health and/or to correct deficiencies. For example, many people are Vitamin D deficient.
4) Mental health. An extreme approach to diet can create eating disorders and may lead to social isolation.
As with most things in life, there is a cost/benefit equation associated with nutrition choices, and focusing purely on efficiency most certainly has its costs - some of which are not obvious. Those costs can have a negative impact on short-term and long-term health. Health is easy to take for granted - until there’s an issue.
The point of my post? I hope that the takeaway from this article isn’t: “make cost efficiency your primary goal in food selection,” but rather, “carefully evaluate your specific situation, establish nutrition goals, and treat food intake like a solution to a problem - just make sure the problem(s) are very well defined.”
This advice applies to those that have the discretionary funds to facilitate this level of selectiveness, which I’m guessing applies to most people reading this.
I'm a big fan of HN and happy to have a reason to create an account and comment after all of these years. I thoroughly enjoy the intelligent conversation here.
As a Starting Strength Coach (there are around 130 of us), I I can confirm that a few of the comments accurately sum up the objections (rather misunderstandings) of the program that H1Supreme highlighted.
The powerclean is an important part of the novice program to build explosive power - the ability to display strength, quickly. It can be substituted by another lift, or a light deadlift day, if the trainee's injury status or age make it an unwise cost/benefit equation. But this is considered a trade-off and isn't ideal.
Yes, the powerclean is technical. So is the squat. And the press. And the bench, to a much lesser degree. Which segues into the issue mentioned in the second point. Elbow pain in the squat. As accurately described by "yepguy," this is indeed a technical error. Here's how to fix it: https://startingstrength.com/training/preventing-elbow-pain-...
A few other thoughts: pwthornton, kettle-bell cleans and snatches are not a substitute for barbell cleans and snatches. What we're chasing is adequate training stress to facilitate an adaptation. One of the primary drivers of that stress is load - weight on the bar. Kettle-bells are too light (comparatively) to create meaningful enough stress to facilitate the stress, recovery, adaptation cycle in the context of training (goal oriented exercise). More reading on the topic: https://startingstrength.com/article/training_vs_exercise
anarchodev, Rippetoe and Starting Strength are more interested in getting regular, everyday people strong than high school football players. Yes, it's a great way for getting young men big and strong (I gained 65lbs), but it's also a way to improve quality of life for octogenarians, for example. The low-bar squat is in the program versus the high bar squat because it uses more muscle mass, which means more weight on the bar can be used. Weight on the bar is the primary consideration in strength training - more of it is what's needed to get stronger. Here is a piece that analyzes the squat in detail: https://startingstrength.com/article/analysis_of_the_squat
ubercore and DataWorker, for the purposes of strength training - low bar works better. It can be applied to any body type. Shorter torso = more horizontal back angle at the bottom of the squat, and vice versa. Goal is to load the hips, which are a more robust joint than the knees and are surrounded by more muscle mass. Low-bar is not one-size-fits-all, its a model for the squat that can be applied to nearly anyone, with rare exception.
michaelgrafl the nature of goblet squats and front squats require a sub-maximal load when compared to the low bar back squat. They may be suitable for an exercise program, but they are not suitable for an efficient strength training program, and most certainly not for a novice. See comment above about training stress.
I have a ton of respect for this community and would love to interact with you guys. Let me know if I can be helpful in any way.
We are one of the few Oral Surgery groups in the US that are qualified to offer full-mouth teeth replacement. The service that we provide for our patients changes everything about the quality of their daily lives. Most are unaware that there are treatment options available to reduce their suffering. We need a marketer that can help us spread the word to the proportion of the 22M people that live near our centers and can benefit from this procedure.
Great pay, flexibility, and benefits - including reimbursement for a co-working space. No resume or cover letter required, just an informal email with details about how your skills & passion match the job description. Relaxed work culture and friendly team. Check it out:
http://bit.ly/2IGYv68